October 21, 1897
The American Sentinel 12
- Contents-
-
- January 7, 1897
- January 14, 1897
- January 21, 1897
- January 28, 1897
- February 4, 1897
- February 11, 1897
- February 18, 1897
- February 25, 1897
- March 4, 1897
- March 11, 1897
- March 18, 1897
- March 25, 1897
- April 1, 1897
- April 8, 1897
- April 15, 1897
- April 22, 1897
- April 29, 1897
- May 6, 1897
- May 13, 1897
- May 20, 1897
- May 27, 1897
- June 3, 1897
- June 10, 1897
- June 17, 1897
- June 24, 1897
- July 1, 1897
- July 7, 1897
- July 15, 1897
- July 22, 1897
- July 29, 1897
- August 5, 1897
- August 12, 1897
- August 19, 1897
- September 2, 1897
- September 9, 1897
- September 16, 1897
- September 23, 1897
- September 30, 1897
- October 7, 1897
- October 14, 1897
- October 21, 1897
- October 28, 1897
- November 4, 1897
- November 11, 1897
- November 18, 1897
- November 25, 1897
- December 2, 1897
- December 9, 1897
- December 16, 1897
- December 23, 1897
-
Search Results
- Results
- Related
- Featured
- Weighted Relevancy
- Content Sequence
- Relevancy
- Earliest First
- Latest First
- Exact Match First, Root Words Second
- Exact word match
- Root word match
- EGW Collections
- All collections
- Lifetime Works (1845-1917)
- Compilations (1918-present)
- Adventist Pioneer Library
- My Bible
- Dictionary
- Reference
- Short
- Long
- Paragraph
No results.
EGW Extras
Directory
October 21, 1897
“Editorial” American Sentinel 12, 41, pp. 641.
THERE is no worse slavery than that of selfishness.AMS October 21, 1897, page 641.1
CREED has been well-defined as the cloister of thought.AMS October 21, 1897, page 641.2
THE truly free man never desires to enslave any one else.AMS October 21, 1897, page 641.3
THE upas-tree of popery flourishes in the soil of human nature.AMS October 21, 1897, page 641.4
CHRISTIANITY knows no “league;” it knows only the “unity of the Spirit.”AMS October 21, 1897, page 641.5
THE right to observe a weekly day of rest is the only one which is sought to be forced upon people by law.AMS October 21, 1897, page 641.6
IF you are a “doer of the law” yourself, you will find neither time nor occasion for judging your neighbor.AMS October 21, 1897, page 641.7
THE most distinguished monopolist in the world is the devil. He is trying the hardest to force everything to go his way.AMS October 21, 1897, page 641.8
THE largest society in the world, the easiest to get into and the best one to get out of and avoid is the Society for Setting Other People Straight.AMS October 21, 1897, page 641.9
EVERY person has a right to refrain from the exercise of any right that he may possess. Otherwise it would not be a right, but an obligation.AMS October 21, 1897, page 641.10
THE Christian goes to his warfare taking the “shield of faith.” Ephesians 6:16. That which is of faith, is a defense to its possessor. If the first-day Sabbath were of faith, it would not need so much defending.AMS October 21, 1897, page 641.11
THE accepted way of “defending” the Sabbath is to compel somebody else to keep it! If there were any defense in this method, the seventh-day Sabbath would long ago have perish for the lack of it.AMS October 21, 1897, page 641.12
“Our Government and God’s Sovereignty” American Sentinel 12, 41, pp. 641, 642.
THE signers of the Declaration of Independence were men who believed in God and acknowledged his rightful sovereignty in earthly affairs.AMS October 21, 1897, page 641.1
This is set forth in the statement—which constitutes the very foundation on which the Declaration rests—that “all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”AMS October 21, 1897, page 641.2
Only upon the basis which these words set forth could the appeal have been made to mankind which was made by our forefathers in this immortal document. If there is not God, then it is not true that all men are created equal and endowed with certain unalienable rights which it is the business of civil government only to secure and never to molest. We appeal from the decisions of majorities to that Being who constitutes the true majority; to Him whose way is always just, and whose word true; but if there be no such Being, then we can only fall back upon the decisions of majorities, fallible as such decisions must be, and unjust and untrue as they are often found to be. The doctrine of unalienable rights is swept away altogether; for if the decision of the majority be our highest rule of guidance, then it rests with the majority to say what our rights are, or whether we have any at all. For if the individual is alone, he cannot properly set himself up above two or more others equal with himself.AMS October 21, 1897, page 641.3
The doctrine of unalienable rights, which underlies the American system of government, rests thus upon the acknowledgment of the sovereignty of God as the Creator of all men. But it is through the Constitution of the United States that this system of government was put into practical operation. And this being so, it is perfectly plain that the Constitution cannot rightfully be called a “Godless” document.AMS October 21, 1897, page 642.1
The doctrine of the unalienable right of mankind rests upon the acknowledgment of the sovereignty of God as the Creator. And it is the only doctrine in harmony with such an acknowledgment; all other doctrines virtually deny it.AMS October 21, 1897, page 642.2
The American system of government is based upon that doctrine; and,—AMS October 21, 1897, page 642.3
The United States Constitution is the instrument through which this system is put into operation.AMS October 21, 1897, page 642.4
Therefore, the United States Constitution is the right constitution, and the only one, consistent with the real acknowledgment of the sovereignty of God in human affairs. Let that acknowledgment, and this Constitution, forever remain.AMS October 21, 1897, page 642.5
“Religious Monopoly” American Sentinel 12, 41, pp. 642, 643.
NOT the least of the monopolies for the establishment of which determined efforts are being put forth at the present time, is one which is designed to cover the field of men’s conduct in religion.AMS October 21, 1897, page 642.1
Religious monopoly is not a new thing—a creation of the nineteenth century. It is as old as the history of mankind. The first man to set one up was Cain, who killed his brother because he practiced a different religion from his own.AMS October 21, 1897, page 642.2
A religious monopoly is the worst of all forms of monopoly, both because religion is of all the things the most essential to human welfare, and because such a monopoly not only seeks to drive all other religious out of the field, but to force everybody to take religion from it as well.AMS October 21, 1897, page 642.3
It declares not only that nobody shall practice a religion contradictory to itself, but that everybody must have religion—of the kind which it supplies—whether the individual wants it or not.AMS October 21, 1897, page 642.4
The religion which is aiming at a monopoly to-day, in this and other “Christian” lands, has for its distinguishing feature the observance of the first day of the week.AMS October 21, 1897, page 642.5
It demands that all men, of whatever race or belief, shall incorporate this distinguishing feature into their conduct, thus becoming in a true sense its adherents.AMS October 21, 1897, page 642.6
This monopoly has behind it a gigantic force of church workers and religious societies. It has already received the support of Congress, the courts, and the State legislatures.AMS October 21, 1897, page 642.7
But there is one other religion in the field which will not yield to this monopoly; and that religion is Christianity. The distinguishing feature of Christianity is faith in the Word of God; hence, it is in contrast with the religion of the monopoly, since the Word of God does not command the observance of the first day of the week.AMS October 21, 1897, page 642.8
A clash between the two religions is inevitable, for Christianity will not yield her ground or turn aside from her appointed course. All false religions can compromise upon some essential feature common to all; but Christianity cannot compromise with anything.AMS October 21, 1897, page 642.9
A religious monopoly which was prophesied for the closing period of earthly history is described in the latter half of the thirteenth chapter of Revelation. There a power is spoken of which should perform miracles in the endeavor to cause the people to “worship the image of the beast,” and it is said of it that “he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive the mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads; and that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.”AMS October 21, 1897, page 642.10
The Sabbath is declared in the Scriptures to be the sign of the true God—he who has creative power. Its observance constitutes a mark upon those who are his people. See Ezekiel 20:12, 20. The Sabbath of the Lord is the seventh day of the week.AMS October 21, 1897, page 643.1
On the other hand is the Sunday, which is claimed by the papacy as the sign of her spiritual power, and the observance of which properly constitutes a mark of adherence to her. In proportion as the clash between Christianity and the would-be religious monopoly becomes more fierce, these opposing marks will acquire the prominence in the field of controversy. They will become the standards, as it were, at the head of the conflicting forces.AMS October 21, 1897, page 643.2
Every opposer of monopolies should understand that opposing the worst of all monopolies he is called to take his stand on the side of Christianity. Christianity has no monopoly. Its whole aim is to bestow freedom, to exalt the race, as individuals, to the plane of that independence of thought and action which is consistent with the highest human welfare.AMS October 21, 1897, page 643.3
“What is Righteousness?” American Sentinel 12, 41, p. 643.
THE “National Christian Citizenship League,” in its “proclamation” and call for a million volunteers to for ... the “Christian citizenship” cause, appeals to “the right-minded, true-hearted men and woman of the Republic who believe with Charles Sumner that ‘righteousness is preservation.’” As it is undoubtedly true that “righteousness is preservation,” and as the class of individuals to whom the league appeals recognize this fact, it is assured that they will join in the Christian citizenship movement, as the proper method of giving practical expression to this belief.AMS October 21, 1897, page 643.1
But to say simply that “righteousness is preservation” without any additional words of qualification, is but to give expression to a “glittering generality,” and one which fails to furnish any indorsement or justification of the “Christian citizenship” campaign.AMS October 21, 1897, page 643.2
What is righteousness? The only authority to which one can turn for an answer to the question, is the Word of God. There we find it stated that “all unrighteousness is sin,” and that “sin is the transgression of the law.” 1 John 3:4; 5:17. From this it is clear that righteousness is the keeping of the law. But it is also written that “by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in His sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.” Romans 3:20. This is because all flesh is by nature “under the law” and “guilty before God,” having fallen in the transgression of Adam. “But now,” the apostle adds, “the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe; for there is no difference; ... being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.” Verses 21-24.AMS October 21, 1897, page 643.3
Therefore apart from faith in Jesus Christ, there is no righteousness for any being on the earth. Righteousness, as it must be known by every person who has it, means the result of faith in Jesus Christ, and the statement that “righteousness is preservation” means that there is preservation in the faith of Christ.AMS October 21, 1897, page 643.4
And this is very true. He who fights “the good fight of faith” lays “hold on eternal life.” 1 Timothy 6:12. Jesus said that whosoever should lose his life for his sake should preserve it. He who gives away treasure through faith in Christ, preserves the same “where moth and rust do not corrupt,” and where riches will never take to themselves wings and fly away.AMS October 21, 1897, page 643.5
But what has all this to do with “Christian citizenship”? What has it to do with the preservation of the government or institutions of the country in which “citizenship” is held? Of what significance to these is the statement that “righteousness is preservation”? For it is evident from the nature of righteousness, as set forth in the foregoing texts, that it is not a thing that can be applied to these at all. Whatever preservation they are to have, they must obtain in another way.AMS October 21, 1897, page 643.6
Faith is the one and only source of righteousness. And faith is not a profession, it is not anything that can be set forth in legal or political documents; it is an actuating, governing principle of life, sent to save the individual sinner, and applicable alone to him. “Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God.”AMS October 21, 1897, page 643.7
“Duty not Based upon Rights” American Sentinel 12, 41, p. 644.
“LAWS forbidding labor on the Sabbath,” we are told by those who advocate them, “are based upon the right of every man to enjoy a day of rest.” This is strange “logic” to apply to the doctrine of human rights.AMS October 21, 1897, page 644.1
Every man has a right to get married; must we therefore have a law compelling all men to marry?AMS October 21, 1897, page 644.2
Every man has a right to acquire property; is it therefore necessary that the acquisition of property should be made compulsory?AMS October 21, 1897, page 644.3
Because some one else has a right to do a thing, must I be forced to do the same thing in order that he may enjoy his right?AMS October 21, 1897, page 644.4
If so, then individual rights are not equal; for my own choice in the matter is made to give place to that of another.AMS October 21, 1897, page 644.5
But individual rights are equal. What another person does in the exercise of a right, I have an equal right to refrain from doing.AMS October 21, 1897, page 644.6
An act done under compulsion is not the exercise of a right. The basis of compulsion is duty, and the power which compels also prescribes duty in respect to the thing compelled.AMS October 21, 1897, page 644.7
When the State, therefore, compels the observance of the Sabbath, it prescribes the duty of every citizen with respect to Sabbath observance. It removes Sabbath observance from the realm of privilege to that of duty.AMS October 21, 1897, page 644.8
The duty of Sabbath observance does not grow out of the right to observe the day, but out of the relation of man to the Author of the Sabbath. The question of the duty of Sabbath observance is first settled in the mind of the individual before he considers it as a matter of personal right.AMS October 21, 1897, page 644.9
It was in the sphere of man’s duty, and not of his rights, that Sabbath observance originated.AMS October 21, 1897, page 644.10
This duty was set forth and commanded by the Creator, the Author of the Sabbath.AMS October 21, 1897, page 644.11
In prescribing Sabbath observance as a duty, the State sets itself in the place of God. It is not the business of the State to prescribe duty.AMS October 21, 1897, page 644.12
The duty does not grow out of the right, but the right out of the duty. The right of Sabbath observance affords no basis for compulsory legislation; it cannot be made the basis of any human law for Sabbath observance.AMS October 21, 1897, page 644.13
Any such law rests upon another basis, and that basis is nothing else than religious intolerance.AMS October 21, 1897, page 644.14
It is the prerogative of God alone to prescribe duty. His law prescribes for mankind, but he leaves men free to choose whether they will walk in that pathway or not. But what the State prescribes by law is taken out of the realm of man’s free choice.AMS October 21, 1897, page 644.15
And when the Sabbath observance is removed from the realm of man’s free choice, by that very act it is denied that Sabbath observance belongs within the sphere of individual rights. The law which claims to be “based upon the right of every man to enjoy a day of rest” each week, in reality denies that any such right exists.AMS October 21, 1897, page 644.16
“Revising History” American Sentinel 12, 41, pp. 644, 645.
IT would be a congenial task for certain Roman Catholic authorities to revise the history of the Middle Ages especially as regards certain important occurrences in which “the church” was a conspicuous actor.AMS October 21, 1897, page 644.1
For example, in the Catholic Mirror of October 9, the Rev. Jos. V. O’Connor comes forward with the statement that “the new spirit of historical research, which seeks the simple truth of fact irrespective of theories or consequences, has settled certain points in the controversy over the [St.] Batholomew massacre;” and that “these succinctly, are: religion had nothing whatever to do with the massacre; it was a measure of Machiavellian social policy. It was not long premeditated, but adopted by the impulse of fear, chiefly of Coligny, and the number of slain cannot be proved to have exceeded 2,000.”AMS October 21, 1897, page 644.2
The writer then goes on to state that the Huguenots had plotted to kidnap King Charges IX., had “incited such provinces to rebellion,” and had “introduced foreign hostile troops into France;” that “the French court, gave a lying report of the massacre, deceived Pope Gregory VI., and he, good easy man, thinking that the king of France had been saved from assassination, publicly praised God;” that Charles IX. and his mother, Catharine de Medici, were “worthless Catholics” anyhow, and that the latter was not a Catholic, but a “free-thinker,” and so it is evident(?) that “religion, either Catholic or Protestant, had nothing to do with the massacre”!AMS October 21, 1897, page 645.1
It is rather remarkable that “facts” can be brought to light at this date which set aside the conclusions observed by the people who lived when this occurrence took place. That these conclusions, as set forth in history were such as to-day reflect anything but credit upon the church,” is a fact for which “the church” is alone responsible. She had every opportunity at the time, and afterwards, to secure a correct version of the affair for transmission to posterity. “The church” ruled almost supremely in the nations of Europe at the time when such occurrences as this passed into history. Why did she allow history to be written and stand as authentic, which is not only false but unfavorable to herself?AMS October 21, 1897, page 645.2
The truth is that the history of those times, as it has come down to us, is essentially true. But in that day the papacy had no wish to change that history; it was not then regarded as of a nature to reflect odium upon her, it was not then deemed, as it is generally to-day, a wicked thing to persecute and put to death “heretics.” The terrible event of St. Bartholomew’s day was regarded as a profitable and even laudable proceeding, and not calling for any apology. And hence Pope Gregory, “good, easy man,” that he was, in giving public thanks and having a ... struck commemorative of the event, did not imagine he was doing anything which might make trouble for the apologists of “the church” in future times.AMS October 21, 1897, page 645.3
The Jews tell us that they did not crucify Jesus Christ, and that it was done by the Roman, Pontius Pilate. And it is true enough that in that and subsequent proceedings of a similar nature against the followers of Christ, the State has been the actor by whose authority and in whose name the persecution was done. And this is why it is so convenient to have a union of religion with the State, and why such a union is always sought by a church which wants power to enforce her religion, and has lost the power which comes from union with her divine Lord.AMS October 21, 1897, page 645.4
It is altogether too late at this date to revise the history of the Middle Ages. The attempt to do so will only expose more clearly the weakness of the claim that “religion had nothing to do” with the tragedies of those times in which the actors were known as papists and Protestants. The would-be explanations by which it is sought to remove all stigma from “the church,” are fitted only for an appeal to credulity and ignorance.AMS October 21, 1897, page 645.5